Mounting 396

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 10:31:27 -0600, Newps wrote
in :



Larry Dighera wrote:


Air Gizmo says a FAA Form 337 field approval is required.


That's not Air Gizmo's call. That is your mechanics.


I understand what you're saying; the A&P/IA puts his certificate on
the line. But given the fact that the OP wasn't able to locate one
who would install the Air Gizmo, do you see what I'm saying?


What's happening is a larger issue. Several years ago the FAA came out
and said basically no more field approvals. Everybody groaned. But few
read the fine print. What the FAA is doing is going back to the way the
rules were intended to be interpreted. This is a good thing. They are
intended to be interpreted by the mechanics. What happened over the
years is the mechanics just got used to calling mother FAA for damn near
everything. The FAA is not where the expertise is, it resides with the
mechanics in the field. The FAA realized this and shifted the
responsibility back where it belongs, with the mechanics. When Air
Gizmo writes that you need a 337 that's just CYA. They have zero say in
the matter. Just like some peoples desire to buy parts with a yellow
tag. A yellow tag means exactly nothing. Only the mechanic installing
the part is the one who can vouch for its airworthiness and he alone
bears that responsibility. So mechanincs have been bitching for years
how restrictive the FAA has been, which is entirely a situation of their
own making and now the FAA has in reality turned them loose. Basically
said read the damn rule book. Now grow some balls and get off our back.

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 13:09:00 -0600, Newps wrote
in :



Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 10:31:27 -0600, Newps wrote
in :



Larry Dighera wrote:


Air Gizmo says a FAA Form 337 field approval is required.


That's not Air Gizmo's call. That is your mechanics.


I understand what you're saying; the A&P/IA puts his certificate on
the line. But given the fact that the OP wasn't able to locate one
who would install the Air Gizmo, do you see what I'm saying?


What's happening is a larger issue. Several years ago the FAA came out
and said basically no more field approvals. Everybody groaned. But few
read the fine print. What the FAA is doing is going back to the way the
rules were intended to be interpreted. This is a good thing. They are
intended to be interpreted by the mechanics. What happened over the
years is the mechanics just got used to calling mother FAA for damn near
everything. The FAA is not where the expertise is, it resides with the
mechanics in the field. The FAA realized this and shifted the
responsibility back where it belongs, with the mechanics. When Air
Gizmo writes that you need a 337 that's just CYA. They have zero say in
the matter. Just like some peoples desire to buy parts with a yellow
tag. A yellow tag means exactly nothing. Only the mechanic installing
the part is the one who can vouch for its airworthiness and he alone
bears that responsibility. So mechanincs have been bitching for years
how restrictive the FAA has been, which is entirely a situation of their
own making and now the FAA has in reality turned them loose. Basically
said read the damn rule book. Now grow some balls and get off our back.

That's reasonable. Hence the inconsistency among Air Gizmo
installers. What about the STC issue?

Larry Dighera wrote:


What's happening is a larger issue. Several years ago the FAA came out
and said basically no more field approvals. Everybody groaned. But few
read the fine print. What the FAA is doing is going back to the way the
rules were intended to be interpreted. This is a good thing. They are
intended to be interpreted by the mechanics. What happened over the
years is the mechanics just got used to calling mother FAA for damn near
everything. The FAA is not where the expertise is, it resides with the
mechanics in the field. The FAA realized this and shifted the
responsibility back where it belongs, with the mechanics. When Air
Gizmo writes that you need a 337 that's just CYA. They have zero say in
the matter. Just like some peoples desire to buy parts with a yellow
tag. A yellow tag means exactly nothing. Only the mechanic installing
the part is the one who can vouch for its airworthiness and he alone
bears that responsibility. So mechanincs have been bitching for years
how restrictive the FAA has been, which is entirely a situation of their
own making and now the FAA has in reality turned them loose. Basically
said read the damn rule book. Now grow some balls and get off our back.


That's reasonable. Hence the inconsistency among Air Gizmo
installers. What about the STC issue?

That's something Air Gizmo would need to consider. It seems silly to
get one since a cursory read of the requirements for a major
modification don't support the need for one.